Wow, a new troll tactic tailored specifically for the DP...Submitted by rucdelaspook on Fri, 06/08/2012 - 23:34
Many of you have probably already come across this thread:
"Curious. How many of you would ever support Rand Paul for President? Vote 'Up' or 'Down'."
It's been around for a while now, and I'll still see it bumped to the top from time to time. When I first read the headline, it immediately raised all sorts of troll-flags in my head. It is a troll thread. Aside from the fact that the topic's only purpose is to promote in-fighting and controversy (all in the name of harmless ol' curiosity), it's headline is carefully worded to produce just the right amount of division and doubt without being overtly trolly.
Take the question itself: How many of you would ever support Rand Paul for President?
Ask yourself this: is the "ever" in that question really necessary? Wouldn't an objective question for an online Paul forum be, "How many of you would support Rand Paul for President?" That 'ever' only serves to inject a bit of bias against the pro-Rand Paul supporters. It's as if to say, 'WOULD YOU EVER IN A MILLION YEARS SUPPORT RAND PAUL!? IN A BILLION YEARS?? IN A TRILLION YEARS??? OH, AND VOTE UP OR DOWN.'
Which brings me to the new troll stratagem I mentioned in the title of this comment. A lot of anti-troll people on the DP have decided that in order to help stop the trolling on this site, it would be a good idea to start voting down trolly threads and comments and voting up good debate/speech. However, in this case, the troll himself, in a near-masterful display of ambiguity and deception, asks the DP community to vote 'Up' or 'Down'. Vote 'up' what? Rand Paul? The thread? With a comment? The body of his thread, two lines of text, doesn't offer up any more clues as to what that means.
"Just curious to see where we are here. Say that 2012 does not happen for Ron Paul, and Obama wins. Would you support a 2016 run by Rand Paul?"
Some individuals on this site, in an act of solidarity and support for Rand Paul, began up-voting the trolly headline because they thought a vote for the thread was a vote for Rand Paul. Check out the thread, it's got around 101 up votes. Again there's not much in the body of the thread, it's just a trolly headline with a call to vote. So in upvoting the posting, it kept the thread underneath the trolly radar; people coming in to the site would read the posting, see that most of the DP community accepted it as a legitimate posting/question, and chime in as to whether or not they supported Rand Paul-- all the while keeping the trolly headline bumped near the top. Granted, that 101 number might ultimately show that there is a lot of support for Rand Paul (even though, since this is the Daily Paul, that should've already kinda been a no-brainer)-- but it also shows that even here, a community which touts the idea of 'waking up' and 'questioning everything', is still capable of falling into the snares of a devious troll. Stay vigilant, DP community.
I implore you: DO NOT UP-VOTE TROLLY HEADLINES.
How did the troll get past the up-vote/down-vote anti-troll system? By conflating the meaning of an up-vote for his tainted item with an up-vote for a good item! (Ex. "I don't care what you jerks say about puppies, I love puppies! Vote 'up' or 'down' if you love puppies!")
So trust your instincts. Ignore the trolls-- only trolls would actively court up-votes anyway...
And I love puppies. :)